Archive for the 'democrat' Category

From the Office of Dave Freudenthal…

Published by
tieki rae
at June 20, 2007 in Republican, US Senate, Wyoming, democrat and freudenthal. 11 Comments

Just in from the Governor’s Office:

June 20, 2007

******FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE******

******NOTE CORRECTED SPELLING OF BARRASSO

Contact: Press Secretary Cara Eastwood
Office: (307) 777-7437
Cell: (307) 421-0197

GOVERNOR’S LETTER TO U.S. SENATE SEAT NOMINEES

CHEYENNE, Wyo. - Gov. Dave Freudenthal sent the following letter today to the three nominees for Wyoming’s vacant U.S. Senate seat.

The letter was addressed individually to the three candidates: John Barrasso, Cynthia Lummis and Tom Sansonetti.

 

I have been notified of your selection as one of three individuals eligible for appointment to serve as a Wyoming Senator pending a special election in 2008.

The statutory scheme does not require you to participate in a conversation with me prior to my appointment of a Senator within five days. However, I would appreciate the opportunity to meet with each of you prior to making the appointment. Given the partisan marathon you have just completed, I can understand a lack of enthusiasm about one more discussion of your thoughts and plans should you become a Senator for Wyoming. In order to make the conversation more useful, I am attaching a partial list of issues/matters (in no particular order) which relate to your potential role as Senator. I am not sure which of these or other items we will discuss, but these are some of the items we see in our office and in Wyoming. I am available Wednesday afternoon and Thursday afternoon in Cheyenne.

Excuse me, but what?  This just seems like a rather asinine statement to make.  After all, I am sure that Sansonetti, Barrasso, and Lummis are exhausted from the intense 2 week selection process, but to imply that they somehow lack enthusiasm to discuss the issues after that is a stretch, at best.  It seems to me — and I could be completely off-base on this — that Freudenthal is trying to get some sort of dig in toward the Republicans.  Either we’re too partisan, or perhaps, that discussing issues of importance to Wyoming’s Senators is not a high priority to the Republican nominees.  I’m really not sure, just unimpressed with that statement overall.

While not on the list, federal fiscal and monetary policy has always been of interest to me and perhaps we can have an illuminating discussion.

If you wish to meet before I make my selection, please let me know. Please contact Barb Warburton at 777.7435. I would also appreciate receiving a copy of any materials you may have submitted to the central committee members. Given the public interest in this process, I am releasing this correspondence contemporaneous with its transmittal to you.

Best regards,
Dave Freudenthal
Governor

Now, here is where it gets good:

Potential Issues/Matters of Interest

Federal funding support for various state, local and private projects
FERC: pipelines, transmission lines, energy corridors
Clean coal and alternative energy
Carbon management/climate change
EPA - air quality
Federal research dollars
Interstate highway system funding
Role of federal government: 2nd Amendment, 10th Amendment
APHIS - brucellosis
Wolves, Sage Grouse, Preble’s Meadow Jumping Mouse, Grizzly, ESA, etc.
Federal disaster designation
Health care - electronic medical records, costs, federal responsibility
Medicaid/Medicare, rural hospitals
Law enforcement
National Guard
Patriot Act
Wyoming Range
Wild and Scenic Rivers
Real ID
Responsibility for immigration policy
Special places in Wyoming
Federal lands - Forest Service, BLM, Park Service
Constituent services
Farm bill/agriculture policy/federal grazing policy
Free trade
Alcohol and substance abuse
National parks
Ability to work on a bi-partisan basis
Unfunded mandates on state/locals
FMR’s - revenue stream
Senate confirmation power
Gasoline prices
Balanced growth - federal government as landlord
Education - NCLB, role of federal government
Water - federal role through Bureau of Reclamation and participation in water projects
Wind River Indian Reservation - federal trust responsibility
Firefighting
Federal objections to state water projects
Air traffic/support for airport construction
Worker Visas
Federal lease buyback

Blah, blah, blah.  Quite the all-encompassing list.  Oh, except for a few other issues that Americans (and Wyomingites) tend to care about… namely, abortion, same sex marriage, the War on Terror, etc.

I’m glad that Freudenthal is concerned about the gasoline prices, but shouldn’t he be asking his fellow DemonRats about that one?  After all, they’re in power now and gas prices have been rising even more.  As for Senate confirmation power and the ability to work on a bi-partisan basis… I think that the Republican nominees ought to promise to do the exact same thing the Democrats did when they were the Senate minority — obstruction of the Constitution, etc.  It’s only fair, right?

I really get the feeling these interviews are just for show.  He knows who he is going to pick.  He’s only biding his time and trying to put on a happy face before revealing it to the people.

Sphere: Related Content

Looking Past 2006

Published by
tieki rae
at November 8, 2006 in 2006 election, Pro-Life, Republican and democrat. 4 Comments

Alright, so the 2006 midterm elections sucked. Wyoming is still red (besides our silly Democrat of a governer, but he was incumbent so it doesn’t count) and that means that the world will ultimately be okay.

The main issue I was watching was South Dakota’s Proposition 6 to ban all abortions in the state. Even though it lost, I consider the movement a partial victory. It was the first official attempt to overturn Roe v. Wade through the true democratic process of voting instead of sitting idly by and letting the oliogarchic Supreme Court make moral decisions for us. Furthermore, the proposition only failed by only 12% - an incredibly small number when you consider that it was asking to ban all abortions (with a mother’s health exception). That blows the pro-abortion crowd’s claim that Americans love abortion out of the water. Essentially, I think that the door has been opened for the pro-life movement to slowly but surely end abortion in America. It is going to take time - a simple fact that I hate given that time equals more deaths, but I truly believe victory is within reach.

Speaking more generally about the election, I don’t think I will ever make official election predictions again. It is simply too easy to predict that the Dems will takeover the house and too hard to realize that my prediction came true. Emotionally, I can’t handle it! Haha, but on a more serious note, I think that the Dems 2006 victory can only lead to a Republican victory in 2008. (If we turn back to our conservative base!)

Why am I so confident about this? Because, after two years of Speaker Pelosi (ugh… I think I just threw up a little) no one, I repeat no one is going to want Democratic leadership to see the light of day ever again. She’s perfect for the Republicans. As long as Republicans refuse to be the same whiny babies that the Dems were in 2000 and 2004 (and every other election in history). As long as Republicans go back to the conservative base and take a strong stance on all issues of limited government and traditional values (read: fight spending, fight illegal immigration, fight abortion), then America will be ready and waiting in 2008.

Oh, and I almost forgot: if Bush could just stop talking, that would be good too. Let Tony Snow talk. Let Cheney talk. Let Michael Steele talk. But Bush is too much of a spineless sissy boy for me. He can’t defend the war. He can’t attack illegal immigration. Really, what is he good for anymore? He just needs to sit back and veto!

Sphere: Related Content

Everyone’s Making Election Predictions

Published by
tieki rae
at November 6, 2006 in 2006 election, Republican, democrat and predictions. 5 Comments

So… I suppose I should contribute.
I went to the House Professor’s Tea last week featuring American Studies Professor Glenn Altschuler. In between not being able to decide if he thought Burns (MT) or Allen (VA) was more “stupid” or “dumb,” he did throw out some surprisingly practical election predictions. He thinks the Dems will take the House and the Reps will keep the Senate. Obviously, I hope that the Reps keep both, but I think we will be doing good to keep the Senate and prevent a veto-proof Dem majority in the House.

Now, for my predictions on the big races:

Wyoming (the most important, obviously): all this talk about tied polls in the house race makes me a little nervous, but I think Cubin (R) will pull it out over Trauner (D). As for the governor, I have no idea. Not being in Wyoming right now pretty much gives me nothing to go off of. Instinct would tell me that Freudenthal (D) will pull through because he is an incumbant and the Hunkins campaign did nothing this summer. But, there is also the chance that Republicans actually vote Republican straight down the ticket. In that case, Hunkins could sweep. Thomas will win the Senate, there’s really not even a question about that. I’m also fairly positive Maxfield, Meyer, and Meyer will win Sec. of State, Treasury, and Auditor respectively.

From here out I’ll go in the same order as Ian at HotAir.

MD: Steele (R) over Cardin (D); CT: Lieberman (I) over Lamont (D); PA: Bob Casey (D) over Rick Santorum (R); VA: Allen (R) over Webb(D); TN: Corker (R) over Ford, Jr. (D); MT: Toss-up; MO: Toss-up; NJ: Menendez (D) over Kean, Jr. (R);
I actually think I agree with all of his picks with the exception that MT is a toss-up. I know the polls are going for Tester, but MT is still a red state at heart and I can’t really see them going too blue… but who really knows? I’m also leaning toward Talent taking MO, but I agree that it’s too close to call. As long as Wyoming stays red, the whole world can go blue for all I care. I took out the OH and MI predictions because I haven’t followed those races at all.

Locally in the upstate New York area, I’m pulling for Ray Meier (R) to beat Michael Acuri (D) for a house seat. I obviously have somewhat of a vested interest, having spent 5 hours campaigning for him on Sunday morning (being yelled at by the leading Catholic church and the leading protestant one - priceless). It’s supposed to be a really close race and it would be amazing for that to go Republican and pro-life!

Now I need to get back to work. Tomorrow night I’ll be election partying it up in the Cook House dining room with my libby House Dean and fellow politically oriented housemates. As long as Cubin wins, I won’t have to leave crying.

p.s. Ann Coulter’s column from last week is brilliant as always.

As millions of lunatic Muslims plot to murder Americans, some Americans — we call them “Soccer Moms” — will cast a vote to save Michael J. Fox this year. In the process, they will put all Americans at risk by voting for a frivolous, dying party.

Sphere: Related Content

Former Senator Tom Who?

Published by
tieki rae
at October 23, 2006 in 2006 election, democrat and tom daschle. 2 Comments

Just saw this via Drudge:

Daschle: Democrats will pick up seven U.S. Senate seats

Hahaha… makes me laugh. I almost forgot this guy existed.
There’s really nothing quote-worthy in this article… besides this:

He also demurred on a possible run for president.

“I haven’t made any decisions, any announcements,” he said. “I think there’s a big field out there … and it’s going to be exciting to see what’s going to happen.”

Daschle visited the politically pivotal states of New Hampshire and Iowa earlier this year to discuss a possible run with voters there.

So, apparently, Daschle has visited New Hampshire to feel the presidential race waters.

(haha, I’m seriously still laughing)

His new motto must be something like: If at first you can’t succeed and hold on to your Senate seat (being the minority leader and all) in South Dakota (of all places!), try try again and run for the presidency!

My question for Mr. Daschle: Honestly, what do you have to do to get a sparsely populated state with no big claim to federal power to sacrifice a Senate Minority Leader and vote in a newbie?

That must take some skill.

Sphere: Related Content

The Congressional Perv Program

Published by
tieki rae
at October 1, 2006 in Republican, daniel crane, democrat, gerry studds, mark foley and scandal. 3 Comments

I’ve been following this story on Hot Air and MSNBC on and off. It’s disgusting. Pathetic. Despicable. Inexcusable. I could go on for a while.

Besides the fact that a “Congressional Page Program” just sounds like a lawsuit waiting to happen - who in their right mind pairs up young teens with corrupted old men? - the politicizing of this whole story is really starting to annoy me. I mean, it really shouldn’t matter whether or not this guy is a Republican or a Democrat. But obviously, it does matter.

The Democrats would be crazy to let this election leverage pass them by. And, since they have chosen to take the road of making it a political issue instead of a moral issue - because they have no morals, that would probably not work out so well for them - I have no choice but to take a brief step down to their level and stroll down memory lane. Well, not my memory… I wasn’t around back in 1983.

This stuck out to me in the MSNBC article:

In 1983, the House censured two lawmakers — Daniel Crane of Illinois and Gerry Studds of Massachusetts — for having improper relationships with pages.

When I read that little blip, I thought to myself, “Now who are these lawmakers and why are we not hearing more about what happened to them?”

Now, I’ll admit straight out that my main source here is Stupidpedia, but their information seems to match everything else I find on Google. I also LexisNexised (can I make that a verb?) both Crane and Studds, but found very little. Not sure if those links will work since I only have access through Cornell. Both articles are admittedly sparse, hence the reliance on Stupidpedia. If anyone can find more accurate sources or more detailed information, let me know. I really am curious, but I can’t devote too much time to this with 2 papers and a midterm looming on my horizon.

So here are the links for Wikipedia’s articles on Crane and Studds. Read through them. Note the similarities and pay close attention to the differences. (Wow, did I just sound like my govt prof or what?) Both pervs admitted to being guilty and the House punished both of them… sort of. It is unfortunate that neither stepped down from their positions. I give Rep. Foley some credit for at least knowing when to call it quits. One of the Lexis articles brings up the difference in media, and I think that probably does have a lot to do with it. Maybe Foley would not have stepped down in 1983 when there were only three news networks and they were all pretty incompetent, but that’s irrelevant.

After the House Ethics Committee decided to censure them both, Crane (the Republican)

“plead guilty to the charge and issued profuse, tearful apologies“

while Studds (the Democrat)

“turned his back and ignored them. Later, at a press conference with the former page standing beside him, the two stated that what had happened between them was nobody’s business but their own.“

Inexplicably, both Crane and Studds then ran for re-election (stupid on so many levels). Crane lost to a Democrat and what do you know, Studds continued to serve his district for another five terms.

Now, all three of these men are perverted freaks that ought to be castrated. (That’s my no-nonsense stance on issues of perversion.) But I can’t get over that one interesting twist. Did anyone notice that the two Republicans are the ones who were condemned by their national party? (Although Crane did win his local primary before losing in the general.) They are out. Foley may get a heck of a book deal, but he won’t be getting any more checks from the good ole’ U.S. The only winner here was Studds. He came out as a gay perv, unashamed of having sex with a minor, and like a pat on the back got re-elected five more times by the Democrats.

Give me a break. Like I said before, ultimately the party does not matter to me. I think they are all losers. But, since the Democrats are making this out to be yet another example of Republican corruption, why is no one bringing up Studds?

 

Sphere: Related Content